Sorry, you need to update your flash player to view this flash animation. You may download the flash player from here. However, you should still be able to view the rest of this page.

War on God

Bigger Text | Default Text | Smaller Text |

Zionists Determine Good and Evil

February 7, 2010

dershowitz-020410.jpg

by Henry Makow Ph.D.

Alan Dershowitz (left) recently called Richard Goldstone "an evil man" for censuring Israel's Dec. 2008 Gaza War in his UN Report.

If God is synonymous with absolute truth and justice, Dershowitz exposes Zionism as a war on God.  Zionists turn good and evil on their head, and define "good" as whatever benefits them.

This is the New World Order folks; "Good" is "what's Good for the Jews."

Speaking on Israeli Army Radio Jan. 31, Alan Dershowitz called Goldstone a "traitor."

He is "using his Jewishness to malign Israel...He is an evil man, one who allowed himself to be used against the Jewish people, an absolute traitor."

Goldstone accused both Israel and Hamas of war crimes but singled Israel out for inflicting a "collective punishment" on civilians.

In "Operation Cast Lead," (Dec 24 2008- Jan 21, 2009) Israel killed 1400 Palestinians, 80% of whom were civilians, the majority women and children. Over 5000 more were wounded. 22,000 structures and 280 schools were destroyed. About 200 Factories and 700 Businesses Damaged. Eight hospitals and 26 clinics were destroyed.

This was in retaliation for the death of four Israelis in all of 2008 from Hamas "rockets." (Another four died from rockets during the conflict.)

In January and February 2008 alone, 63 Israelis died in road accidents.  
That's 378 on an annualized basis.

richard-goldstone.jpg(Richard Goldstone, left)

Just as 378 fatalities are the price of driving, four deaths in 2008 from rockets is a small price for stealing a whole country and confining over a million refugees to an open air prison.

But let a few Jews question Israel's savagery and they are "traitors...evil [men.]"

If Zionists like Dershowitz want to get metaphysical, surely they represent evil, and are the greatest threat to world peace.


SUBJECTIVITY

In his book "Sex and Character," (1903), Austrian Jewish philosopher Otto Weininger compared Jews to women in that some are incapable of moral objectivity or intellectual honesty. They don't seem to understand that good and evil, truth and untruth, are independent of them, their dictate or interests.

As the self-chosen leaders of a self-chosen people, Zionists have a mission to reorganize the world and reality itself. The Illuminati bankers, many of whom are Jewish or part-Jewish, are tapping into this tendency to play God and turn reality upside down.

As God usurpers, organized Jewry is incapable of admitting doing wrong, or that anti-Semitism is the result. Why should they? They are God. They would sooner convince the whole world it is wrong.

I was living in Israel Feb 21,1973 when the Israelis shot down a Lybian airliner killing 105 passengers. The plane had accidentally strayed into the Sinai. I was appalled by the self pitying hand wringing and mealy mouthed excuses. "We'd look into your blue eyes and do it all over again," one commentator wrote. I didn't stay.

"UNDERDOG"

In a recent article, Robert Fisk remarks on the Israeli need to play underdog always at the edge of annihilation.

"Forget Israel's invasion of Lebanon in 1982 and the 15,000 Lebanese and Palestinian dead. Forget the Sabra and Shatila massacre that same year by Israel's militia allies as their troops watched. Erase the Qana massacre of 1996 - 106 Lebanese killed by Israeli shellfire, more than half of them children - and delete the 1,500 in the 2006 Lebanon war...- if you believe the security elite of Israel's right wing here in Herzliya - [Israel] is now under an even more dangerous, near-unprecedented attack."

Despite having over 200 nuclear bombs, Israel fans this hysteria better to wage an endless war of aggression. Ordinary Israelis feel they have no choice but fight. (See, my "The Zionist Protection Racket.")

Jews are on the defensive because they think they're hated for no reason. They think that to admit wrong would justify their extermination. Not true. Many Jews are agents and scapegoats for the agenda of the Illuminati Jewish bankers. No one wants to exterminate them, but anti-Semitism will grow as the New World Order becomes more apparent and more onerous.


CONCLUSION

As a Jew, I am tired of Zionists defining the Jewish interest; tired of their relentless distortion of truth.

I am sick of the US Congress and media towing the Zionist line; sick of how Zionists manufacture anti-Semitism to make Jews conform.

The New World Order is redefining reality (Good and Evil) in terms of the Illuminati banker agenda. Jews (Neocons, Liberals,Communists, Socialists, Feminists) have been brainwashed to advance their world government agenda and to destroy all collective identity, i.e. race, religion, nation and family (gender.)

Ordinary Jews will take the fall. If they remain complacent, they'll have no one to blame but themselves. But I'm thankful for righteous Jews like Richard Goldstone who recognize truth and have the courage to tell it.

----
Makow--On the July-August 2006 Lebanon War

"Gaza in Plain Language" (YouTube)



You can find this article permanently at http://www.henrymakow.com/zionists_define_good_and_evil.html
Articles >>

Comments for " Zionists Determine Good and Evil"

Hans said (February 8, 2010):

enry, Zionism and Satanism is the same, both disregard the Commandmends given by God and replace them with man-made rules, fitting exactly to the wishes of those in power, or those who are "would-be" leaders!

The principle is a clear pattern - if someone can not be what he wants to be, he is changing the rules until they fit!

That is not restricted to Jews, even though Zionism is often and mistakenly attributed to Jews alone - it is rather a state of mind, a "value-system" if you like, one where moral values are corrupted and re-defined.

I met an American, self appointed "Leader of a Church" - an evangelical "Christian", who stated flat out: whatever i do is justified, as i serve the Lord" - well, every crook and murderer can say this in a vain attempt to justify his crimes.

If people are seeking their own will, and are bending a reality in which they are not what they want to be, they become Satanists and they follow his example, and fall for his promise and lie, to become "God-like."

Felix said (February 8, 2010):

Sir, you wrote in your article: "In his book "Sex and Character," (1903), Austrian Jewish philosopher Otto Weininger compared Jews to women in that some are incapable of moral objectivity or intellectual honesty. They don't seem to understand that good and evil, truth and untruth, are independent of them, their dictate or interests."

This is precisely why Judaism itself is NOT part of the western tradition. The tradition of the west, largely transmitted down to us through Christianity, is that truth is knowable and exists outside of the knower. (In fact, in most traditions other this is commonly held.)

In Judaism, however, the paramount question is not "Is it true?" but "Is it good for the Jews." With a central philosophy as racist as this, is it any wonder adherents to such a religion smugly believe their superiority?

We in the West will do well to recognize that the Hebraic tradition is as alien to us as Islam, and that it must never have more than a minor place in our society if our traditions and cultures are to survive.

Brent said (February 8, 2010):

Just wait Henry until they finally pull the whole rug out from the world economy.

Should have read the bank stocks message boards during the Fall of 2008. It was quite ugly.

All fingers will be pointing at the Jews Henry, and ordinary Jews will be pretty much be forced to go to Israel.

And those not forced will do so in fear for their very lives. The Exodus from the West is coming soon.

So your absolutely right Henry, good peace loving Jewish people are going to take the fall for an evil few.

But yet it seems history has always had the masses suffer for the evil few, no matter what race.

Soon it will all be over though, and the good will prevail.

Becky said (February 8, 2010):

Henry--it is not just Jews that are being maligned for telling the truth about Israel and its genocidal behaviour. We Canadians will be before the hate crimes facist group for stating the truth about Israel--by dictate of our own government.

'Turning reality upside down' is a ploy that works for our government in relation to their dictates about Israel. We are in Afghanistan to 'save the women and children' and 'give female children an education' but 'stand with Israel' when they kill children, demolish schools and hospitals and say not a word.

What I don't understand is why does 'victimhood' protect Israel from sanctions while the Palestinians have no recourse to any aid. They are held in the biggest outdoor refugee camp in the world while having their homes and land stolen and we do nothing? Who are the real victims here?

Interestingly the Jews already have a homeland. It is Birobidjan http://www.tellingfilms.co.uk/birobidjan.htm and has been their homeland for the past 76 years, so why are they stealing Palestine?

I thank God for people like Richard Goldstone. We must know the truth to be set free. The majority of us know the difference between good and evil--but sadly evil seems to be the side that our governments and their controllers have chosen for us.

becky

Morris said (February 8, 2010):

Even though it was instilled and beaten into me from circumcision till bar mitzvah, the jew identity just could not stick.

i was fortunate to have acquired an oppositional/defiant behavior syndrome due to perinatal trauma, which put me at odds with authority from the get go.

so the brainwashing did not work and it inspired me to investigate and i continue to research and uncover more of the true history of the so called JEWS.

just the last one hundred years of jewish atrocities would fill volumes of indictments against them.

but they know very well how to use deception and secrecy to remain incognito.

as this dark period ends, the increasing light and consciousness will wither their bullyboy bravery and put them in their place.

karma is not off by a hair and the hells are vast and deep.

we who laugh, last. and isn't this pathetic group and it's world power fantasy a hoot?

who, is a self hating JEW? the pedophile rabbid or the renunciate of judaism who lives by universal accepted precepts.

the JEWS can't get along with the various goyim nations and they cannot get along with other so called JEWS.

it is the ultimate exclusionary philosophy which results in extinction of worlds. this world is our classroom and they want to bomb it out of existence.

we have the ability to cultivate and become enlightened here on planet earth. this potential they want to destroy.

they want all to be in thrall to their satanic power and serve them as shabbas goyim.
it is time to do some jew-jitsu and put these demonic and deluded people where they belong.

Rony said (February 8, 2010):

In fact, the very basic idea is that nothing serves Israel better than playing the underdog.

Despite it's military superiority in the Middle East and its diplomatic superiority world wide (the UN is one sample among many), Isarel has never stopped pretending to the world that it's a victim threatened in its very foundation.

As a Lebanese, I deeply like the fact that Jews, Muslims and Christians share Palestine (or call it whatever you want). I just don't know why people there are bound to fight each other endlessly...

True that the Illuminati agenda hurts Jews as much as it does to non Jews, but, meanwhile, I wonder why zionists would bear all these wars and all the blood shed since the foundation of Israel.

Are they silly enough to be convinced that killing and being killed is the best way to advance their agenda and make Israel their heaven on earth?

I really doubt it. And this again begs the question: Why do they proceed in this violent perspective?

Too bad that the answer isn't anywhere near to be found, at least to someone innocently dreaming of peace among human beings, the way I am

Matt said (February 8, 2010):

Because they have benefited materially by Jewish financial and cultural dominance of the West , most Jews remain silently complicit, ignoring Israel's evil ways, and, as you point out, they seem content with the evil outpourings of Zionism and Jews like Dershowitz. But it is true also that Christian institutions are similarly complicit, refusing to speak out against the hideous crimes of Israel thus legitimizing Zionism's calumny and feeding it.

This sort of corruption will lead to world war and the Jews will have supremacy over the ruins of civilization and where the survivors are completely insane.

MA said (February 8, 2010):

Thanks for this discerning article. This defining of good and evil by this cohort is manifest all around us.

As we the family orientated masses are hanging by a thread trying to hold everything together by maintaining moral standards in the home, trying (in vain generally) to enrich our marriages, trying to shield the children from corrupting and abusive influences... we, concurrently, have new TV programs released like 'cougar town' (making light of a woman's multiple adulterous adventures), than of course 'the good wife', which is apparently a 'good' woman struggling to deal with her 'wicked' husband's adultery.

The mind screwing is so obvious now that, if it wasn't so deadly serious, you'd have laugh at how stupid these people are. How did we ever let them gain so much traction??


Below - "Feminist Law Persecutes Men" (Scroll Down)

Bigger Text | Default Text | Smaller Text |

Defending Yourself Against "Legal Fiction"

February 6, 2010

corporate_personhood3.gif(Editor's Note: Again, I don't pretend to understand this "legal fiction" argument, and welcome clarifications by knowledgeable readers.)

by Rino

The 'false allegation' industry also exists here in Australia. We need to draw back the curtain and begin to pay attention to the man behind the curtain.

There are critical points to understand. Once the world went off the Gold standard, the people now in effect became dead to the Law.. All courts are courts belonging the central banks, being the creditor in any case. A Judge cannot see the substantive Law in relation to a man or woman's God-given rights anymore under public policy. Public policy refers to the bankruptcy/insolvency of that nation.
 
All charges are against the created Birth Certificate Trust estate/prepaid account recognized by the all capital letter name.

The person who is charged is NOT the man but his corporate entity account. All the courts want is to settle a public account and they want access to your Birth Certificate trust/prepaid estate account.

When you argue/defend and a claim, which in commerce is a demand for money, you are in effect saying 'I don't want to pay' and at this point of dishonour there may be more bogus charges/claims come forward due to this. So all legislative acts apply only to these corporate persons, individuals, taxpayers, residents, etc.; and guess what, they are all created fictions of law. They are not real they are created fictions of law.
 
The idea is not to argue/defend because the living man or woman is not even named as a party in any court action, only the birth certificate/Corporate Trust entity is named.

That is why it is said that 'arguments are for fools'. This information applies in Canada, Australia, America and anywhere else where a central bank exists.

So what happens when there is a 'Charge' against someone? An account is created and it must be settled otherwise someone is placed in prison as collateral for that debt. Arguing and defending creates problems.
 
This is what they do when they create a charge. The courts/agencies use the important concept/principle of 'Bankers Acceptance law'. It is the important concept and principle of primary liability.  The newly created charge is created by the 'maker' of the instrument, i.e, lawyer, agency, court or any other third party entity and the bankers acceptance law goes like this, 'The primary liability to 'pay' an instrument rests with the maker ( i.e lawyer, agency, prosecutor, court etc) of that instrument UNLESS someone else (The charged entity) refuses (argues or defends) to pay.

Under the rules of Admiralty Law, he who brings forward a charge must also bring forward the remedy and that remedy is your birth Certificate/Trust prepaid asset account. The reason they 'falsely charge' people is because they are well aware of the existence of this Trust account and you are deemed to be in control of your estate, operating as a Trustee of that account.

However they will never openly admit to this under public policy and they will always remain silent and refer you to some legislative act and make you think it applies to you.
 
When they say to you that 'anything you say can and will be used against you', what they are really saying is be careful how you respond to our presentment/claims because you may not know what it is that we are really asking of you!

They know and understand that all energy comes from the living man who in reality is the creditor, however if you create dishonour they will treat you as the debtor and the debtor has no rights.

What is the false allegation industry really all about? It is proof that you have in fact an prepaid Trust/estate account created at your birth and evidenced by your birth Certificate. Your birth certificate is evidence of two things: 1) that a Trust does in fact exist and 2) it is a security, which is used as collateral by any government to receive funding from the central banks.
 
If you understand that the Bible tells us not to charge your 'brother' because you make a debtor of him and this is why those in power know and understand this concept. This is why they created the fiction corporate entity because it is supposed to protect/buffer you.

Once Adam and Eve dishonoured the creator, they were taken out of the Garden of Eden which was no longer a commercial free zone and absolutely everything that is done, is done in commerce involving commercial accounts.

Ever since then the same principle has applied, creditors are winners and debtors are losers! Were we not told to be the 'head' (creditor) and not the 'tail' (debtor)? Its all about an account, the rest is all illusion, just ask for the bill so that you can do a bankers acceptance by your endorsement of the charging instrument/complaint and proceed to settle and close the account. However be prepared they will test you first.
 
We as living people no longer know or understand who we are and everything has been inverted upside down. We have lost our identities and once again have given away our birthright for "bowl of pottage."
 ----

First Comment: Paul

Greetings Henry,

In our work to date, we have come across these claims
several times:  it's important to realize that some of them
can be substantiated with good authority, while others
appear to be theories that have somehow "morphed" into fact
primarily for the one(s) asserting such claims.


These two short essays are good places to begin,
to acquire a necessary foundation:

http://www.supremelaw.org/press/rels/cracking.title.28.htm
http://www.supremelaw.org/letters/us-v-usa.htm
(Note well that the U.S. Supreme Court has held that
the Federal government is NOT a corporation!)


Our letter to Bill Gates re: USA v. Microsoft, Inc.
goes into many similar issues:

http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/microsoft/transmittal.htm


In actual litigation we have already established that the entity
"UNITED STATES OF AMERICA" incorporated twice in Delaware,
but both corporations were later revoked by the Delaware
Secretary of State:

http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/usa.inc/
http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/usa.inc/registered.agent.2007-02-12.gif

http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/usa.corp/
http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/usa.corp/registered.agent.2007-02-12.gif

When this fraud was exposed by our office,
The Conspiracy (of which you write so often),
re-incorporated "THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA"
also in Delaware, as if adding "THE" would cure the manifold
problems that resulted from impersonating the Federal government
with a Delaware corporation, when both are legally "foreign"
with respect to each other:

http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/usa.inc/THE.UNITED.STATES.OF.AMERICA.JPG


Legally speaking, all corporations chartered in any of the 50 States are
"foreign" corporations with respect to the District of Columbia:

http://www.supremelaw.org/fedzone11/htm/chaptr11.htm

Foreign corporation. 
A corporation doing business in one state though chartered
or incorporated in another state is a foreign corporation as to the first state, and,
as such, is required to consent to certain conditions and restrictions
in order to do business in such first state.


Now, we went the next step and inquired with a sample of
Secretaries of State in other States of the Union, and
all confirmed that UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
failed to register as a "foreign" corporation with their offices:

http://www.supremelaw.org/sos/
http://www.supremelaw.org/sos/al/
http://www.supremelaw.org/sos/al/usa.corp.certificate.gif
http://www.supremelaw.org/sos/al/usa.inc.certificate.gif

http://www.supremelaw.org/sos/ca/
http://www.supremelaw.org/sos/ca/usa.corp.certificate.gif
http://www.supremelaw.org/sos/ca/usa.inc.certificate.gif


This next one, domiciled in Washington State, is likewise quite deceptive:

http://www.supremelaw.org/sos/wa/Corporations%20Registration%20Detail.htm

UNITED ESTATES OF AMERICA, LLC


The use of "UNITED STATES OF AMERICA" [sic] as the "Plaintiff"
on all Federal criminal "INDICTMENTS", and on all Federal civil cases, initiated by the U.S. Department of Justice, appears to be an expertly concealed attempt to avoid invoking the Judicial Power of the United States, by which the U.S. Constitution very clearly requires that the "United States" (Federal government) be the Proper Party:

http://www.supremelaw.org/ref/whuscons/whuscons.htm#3:2:1

Instead, they are invoking the legislative power of the United States (Federal government) chiefly by convening a legislative tribunal instead of a constitutional court.


A much longer, and much more detailed explanation, can be
found in these two briefs which I filed at the U.S. Supreme Court,
to which 48 UNlicensed ATTORNeys either fell silent, or
formally waived their clients' right to answer:

http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/aol/cert.htm#drama
http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/aol/mandamus.2.htm

Soon after filing those 2 briefs at the U.S. Supreme Court,
Justice O'Connor retired and Chief Justice Rehnquist died.
Also, Ginsburg, Thomas and Breyer turned up withOUT
PRESIDENTIAL COMMISSIONS:

http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/aol/letter.2004-02-12/letter01.gif


Lastly, there is some documentary evidence to support
the notion that parties who are in fact at war with each other
may not refer formally to each other by their Proper Names;
instead a "nom de guerre" is a customary legal requirement
under the Law of Nations.  For authorities in support of
this proposition, see:

http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/barber/2-A-MEMORANDUM%20OF%20LAW.htm




You can find this article permanently at http://www.henrymakow.com/defending_yourself_against_leg.html
Articles >>

Comments for "Defending Yourself Against "Legal Fiction""

Robert said (February 8, 2010):

You & your readers might want to check out the introduction of the living temple audio at www.creditorsincommerce.com. In the first 30 minutes he explains how the international bankers have taken the sovereignty of the American people.

Here's a video of a guy in Canada who was exercising his common law right to travel & his encounter with the police.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=hfbfpz4iYDU

Keep us updated with this "Freeman on the land" information. I believe this is how we will defeat the nwo.

David said (February 8, 2010):

It has occurred to me that one reason why Obama and his handlers/managers have gone to so much effort to prevent anyone from finding his actual birth certificate is connected with this stuff, and they may have arranged that there is no actual birth certificate for him. He has been CIA property since before birth. Consider that.

Wayne said (February 7, 2010):

Eldon Warman has a well researched explanation for all this at www.detaxcanada.org

Jimmy said (February 7, 2010):

Is there any way by which anyone charged with some crime or misdemeanor, can settle this "debt" with the courts/bankers without further incurring into any other legal charges being posted against your record, as for example being actually convicted of these crimes or misdemeanors? In other words, is there a pay-your-way-out-of-it method?

P said (February 7, 2010):

Proving what the 'legal fiction' mess is all about and proving that the courts are commercial (ie: Admiralty Law) is hard to do as the villains left no handbook as to how they constructed this whole false 'legal' realm. One thing that IS easy to prove is the legal fiction that they have hung around your neck (of course you and your Mother voluntarily accepted it - that's how everything from driver's licenses to income tax works in this country). Check everything you have with an ID on it that is issued by governments, Banks, Credit Unions, Insurance companies, tax forms, or corporations and you will find that it is issued to or sent to JOHN DOE and not John Doe. There are only three entities that I can think of that have ALL CAPS names: Trusts, corporations, vessels (ships).

In legal terms this is known as 'idem sonans' = 'sounds alike' and 'stramineus Homo' = a straw man, a substitute put forward as bail or security (from Black's Law Dictionary). When the Judge calls for JOHN DOE and you, John Doe answer, you have accepted (without knowing it) the responsibility for all of the legal fiction's ('ens legis' being) liabilities. Once you have answered for the 'fiction' - you are screwed !

It is easy enough to get out of this Babylonian system but first you have to understand it completely. You must first understand who you really are (this requires you to have some Biblical knowledge and some knowledge of the founding Father's intent, then you need to fully understand how you have been hood winked. For that knowledge I recommend that you study the following website: http://www.usavsus.info/ and watch the 'It's an Illusion' video that can be found here: http://www.tpuc.org/node/558

PJ said (February 7, 2010):

HI Henry, WIKI: The Seventh Amendment (Amendment VII) of the United States Constitution, which is part of the Bill of Rights, codifies the right to a jury trial in certain civil trials. Unlike most of the Bill of Rights, the Supreme Court has not incorporated the amendment's requirements to the states under the Fourteenth Amendment.

“ In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.”

PS: For the ordinary person who is called into the court room in any dispute over $20, at the first hearing it can be a good idea to "Demand a Jury trial."


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seventh_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution

Jeffrey said (February 7, 2010):

Henry: This will help explain Rino's "legal fiction" argument.

In addition, you may purchase the book, "They Own It All, Including You"


Edward Mandell House had this to say in a private meeting with Woodrow Wilson (President) [1913-1921]

[Very] soon, every American will be required to register their biological property in a National system designed to keep track of the people and that will operate under the ancient system of pledging. By such methodology, we can compel people to submit to our agenda, which will affect our security as a charge back for our fiat paper currency. Every American will be forced to register or suffer not being able to work and earn a living. They will be our chattel, and we will hold the security interest over them forever, by operation of the law merchant under the scheme of secured transactions. Americans, by unknowingly or unwittingly delivering the bills of lading to us will be rendered bankrupt and insolvent, forever to remain economic slaves through taxation, secured by their pledges. They will be stripped of their rights and given a commercial value designed to make us a profit and they will be non the wiser, for not one man in a million could ever figure our plans and, if by accident one or two would figure it out, we have in our arsenal plausible deniability. After all, this is the only logical way to fund government, by floating liens and debt to the registrants in the form of benefits and privileges. This will inevitably reap to us huge profits beyond our wildest expectations and leave every American a contributor or to this fraud which we will call “Social Insurance.”

Without realizing it, every American will insure us for any loss we may incur and in this manner; every American will unknowingly be our servant, however begrudgingly. The people will become helpless and without any hope for their redemption and, we will employ the high office of the President of our dummy corporation to foment this plot against America.”

Mike said (February 7, 2010):

Regarding your article posted here:

http://www.henrymakow.com/defending_yourself_against_leg.html

The reason you can't understand the article is because it is written so poorly nobody could understand it, the comment following it is much shorter but conveys far more intelligible information.

Why do you post crap like this?

--

Mike,

For the comments?

H

"The Criminalization of the Male Population" -THE REAL FACE OF SEXISM

Bigger Text | Default Text | Smaller Text |

American Gulag -- Feminist Laws Persecute Men

February 5, 2010

familylaw.jpg"We shall regulate mechanically all the actions of the political life of our subjects by new laws."  Protocols of Zion- 5


by Stephen Baskerville Ph.D.

(Abridged by Henry Makow)


Men accused of rape today enjoy few safeguards. "People can be charged with virtually no evidence," says Boston former sex-crimes prosecutor Rikki Klieman. "If a female comes in and says she was sexually assaulted, then on her word alone, with nothing else -- and I mean nothing else, no investigation -- the police will go out and arrest someone."

Almost daily we see men released after decades in prison because DNA testing proves they were wrongly convicted. Yet the rape industry is so powerful that proof of innocence is no protection.

"A defendant who can absolutely prove his innocence ... can nonetheless still be convicted, based solely on the word of the accuser," write Stuart Taylor and K.C. Johnson in Until Proven Innocent. In North Carolina, simply "naming the person accused" along with the time and place "will support a verdict of guilty." Crime laboratories are notorious for falsifying results to obtain convictions.

'WOMEN NEVER LIE'

The feminist dogma that "women never lie" goes largely unchallenged. "Any honest veteran sex assault investigator will tell you that rape is one of the most falsely reported crimes," says Craig Silverman, a former Colorado prosecutor known for zealous prosecutions. Purdue University sociologist Eugene Kanin found that "41% of the total disposed rape cases were officially declared false" during a nine-year period, "that is, by the complainant's admission that no rape had occurred."

In the infamous Duke University lacrosse case, prosecutor Michael Nifong suppressed exculpating evidence and prosecuted men he knew to be innocent, according to Taylor and Johnson. Nifong himself was eventually disbarred, but he had willing accomplices among assistant prosecutors, police, crime lab technicians, judges, the bar, and the media.

"Innocent men are arrested and even imprisoned as a result of bogus claims," writes Linda Fairstein, former head of the sex-crimes unit for the Manhattan District Attorney, who estimates that half of all reports are unfounded.

Innocence projects are almost wholly occupied with rape cases (though they try to disguise this fact). Yet no systematic investigation has been undertaken by the media or civil libertarians into why so many innocent citizens are so easily incarcerated on fabricated allegations. The exoneration of the Duke students on obviously trumped-up charges triggered few investigations -- and no official ones -- to determine how widespread such rigged justice is against those unable to garner media attention.

MEDIA COMPLICITY

The world of rape accusations displays features similar to other feminist gender crimes: media invective against the accused, government-paid "victim advocates" to secure convictions, intimidation of anyone who defends the accused. "Nobody dependent on the mainstream media for information about rape would have any idea how frequent false claims are," write Taylor and Johnson.

"Most journalists simply ignore evidence contradicting the feminist line." What they observe of rape characterizes feminist justice generally: "calling a rape complainant 'the victim' -- with no 'alleged'." "Unnamed complainants are labeled 'victims' even before legal proceedings determine that a crime has been committed," according to CMR.

Rape hysteria, false accusations, and distorted scholarship are rampant on university campuses, which ostensibly exist to pursue truth. "If a woman did falsely accuse a man of rape," opines one "women's studies" graduate, "she may have had reasons to. Maybe she wasn't raped, but he clearly violated her in some way."

This mentality pervades feminist jurisprudence, precluding innocence by obliterating the distinction between crime and hurt feelings. A Vassar College assistant dean believes false accusations foster men's education: "I think it ideally initiates a process of self-exploration.... 'If I didn't violate her, could I have?'"

Conservative critics of the Duke fiasco avoided feminism's role but instead emphasized race -- a minor feature of the case but a safer one to criticize. Little evidence indicates that white people are being systematically incarcerated on fabricated accusations of non-existent crimes against blacks. This is precisely what is happening to men, both white and black, accused of rape and other "gender" crimes that feminists have turned into a political agenda.


DOMESTIC VIOLENCE = PROSECUTION OF MALES

Like rape, domestic "violence" is defined so loosely that it need not be violent. The U.S. Justice Department definition includes "extreme jealousy and possessiveness" and "name calling and constant criticizing."

For such "crimes" men are jailed with no trial. In fact, the very category of "domestic" violence was developed largely to circumvent due process requirements of conventional assault statutes. A study published in Criminology and Public Policy found that no one accused of domestic violence could be found innocent, since every arrestee received punishment.

Here, too, false accusations are rewarded. "Women lie every day," attests Ottawa Judge Dianne Nicholas. "Every day women in court say, 'I made it up. I'm lying. It didn't happen' -- and they're not charged."

Amazingly, bar associations sponsor seminars instructing women how to fabricate accusations. Thomas Kiernan, writing in the New Jersey Law Journal, expressed his astonishment at "the number of women attending the seminars who smugly -- indeed boastfully -- announced that they had already sworn out false or grossly exaggerated domestic violence complaints against their hapless husbands, and that the device worked!" He added, "The lawyer-lecturers invariably congratulated the self-confessed miscreants."

Domestic violence has become "a backwater of tautological pseudo-theory," write Donald Dutton and Kenneth Corvo in Aggression and Violent Behavior. "No other area of established social welfare, criminal justice, public health, or behavioral intervention has such weak evidence in support of mandated practice."

FALSE CLAIMS A STRATEGY

Scholars and practitioners have repeatedly documented how "allegations of abuse are now used for tactical advantage" in custody cases and "become part of the gamesmanship of divorce." Domestic abuse has become "an area of law mired in intellectual dishonesty and injustice," according to the Rutgers Law Review.

Restraining orders removing men from their homes and children are summarily issued without any evidence. Due process protections are so routinely ignored that, the New Jersey Law Journal reports, one judge told his colleagues, "Your job is not to become concerned about the constitutional rights of the man that you're violating."

 Attorney David Heleniak calls New Jersey's statute "a due process fiasco" in the Rutgers Law Review. New Jersey court literature openly acknowledges that due process is ignored because it "perpetuates the cycle of power and control whereby the [alleged?] perpetrator remains the one with the power and the [alleged?] victim remains powerless." Omitting "alleged" is standard even in statutes, where, the Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly reports, "the mere allegation of domestic abuse ... may shift the burden of proof to the defendant."

Special "integrated domestic violence courts" presume guilt and then, says New York's openly feminist chief judge, "make batterers and abusers take responsibility for their actions." They can seize property, including homes, without the accused being convicted or even formally charged or present to defend himself.

Lawyer Walter Fox describes these courts as "pre-fascist": "Domestic violence courts ... are designed to get around the protections of the criminal code. The burden of proof is reduced or removed, and there's no presumption of innocence."

Forced confessions are widespread. Pennsylvania men are incarcerated unless they sign forms stating, "I have physically and emotionally battered my partner." The man must then describe the violence, even if he insists he committed none. "I am responsible for the violence I used," the forms declare. "My behavior was not provoked."

CHILD SUPPORT CHOKE-HOLD

Equally feminist is the child-support machinery, whereby millions have their family finances plundered and their lives placed under penal supervision without having committed any legal infraction. Once they have nothing left to loot, they too are incarcerated without trial.

Contrary to government propaganda (and Common Law tradition), child support today has little to do with fathers abandoning their children, deserting their marriages, or even agreeing to a divorce. It is automatically assessed on all non-custodial parents, even those involuntarily divorced without grounds ("no-fault"). It is an entitlement for all divorcing mothers, regardless of their actions, and coerced from fathers, regardless of their fidelity.

The "deadbeat dad" is far less likely to be a man who abandoned the offspring he callously sired than to be a loving father who has been, as attorney Jed Abraham writes in From Courtship to Courtroom, "forced to finance the filching of his own children."

Federalized enforcement was rationalized to reimburse taxpayers for welfare. Under feminist pressure, taxpayers instead subsidize middle-class divorce, through federal payments to states based on the amount of child support they collect. By profiting off child support at federal taxpayer expense, state governments have a financial incentive to encourage as many single-mother homes as possible. They, in turn, encourage divorce with a guaranteed, tax-free windfall to any divorcing mother.

While child support (like divorce itself) is awarded ostensibly without reference to "fault," nonpayment brings swift and severe punishments. "The advocates of ever-more-aggressive measures for collecting child support," writes Bryce Christensen of Southern Utah University, "have moved us a dangerous step closer to a police state."


GULAG FOR 'DEADBEAT DADS'

... Assembly-line hearings can last 30 seconds to two minutes, during which parents are sentenced to months or years in prison. Many receive no hearing but are accused in an "expedited judicial process" before a black-robed lawyer known as a "judge surrogate."

 Because these officials require no legislative confirmation, they are not accountable to citizens or their representatives. Unlike true judges, they may lobby to create the same laws they adjudicate, violating the separation of powers. Often they are political activists in robes. One surrogate judge, reports the Telegraph of Hudson, New Hampshire, simultaneously worked "as a radical feminist lobbying on proposed legislation" dealing with child support.

Though governments sensationalize "roundups" of alleged "deadbeat dads," who are jailed for months and even years without trial, no government information whatever is available on incarcerations.

The Bureau of Justice Statistics is utterly silent on child-support incarcerations. Rebecca May of the Center for Family Policy and Practice found "ample testimony by low-income non-custodial parents of spending time in jail for the nonpayment of child support." Yet she could find no documentation of their incarceration...

We know the arrests are extensive. To relieve jail overcrowding in Georgia, a sheriff and judge proposed creating detention camps specifically for "deadbeat dads." The Pittsburgh City Planning Commission has considered a proposal "to convert a former chemical processing plant ... into a detention center" for "deadbeat dads."

Rendered permanently in debt by incarceration, fathers are farmed out to trash companies and similar concerns, where they work 14-16 hour days with their earnings confiscated.
 

MORE MALICIOUS MAYHEN

Other incarcerations are also attributable to feminism. The vast preponderance of actual violent crime and substance abuse proceeds from single-parent homes and fatherless children more than any other factor, far surpassing race and poverty. The explosion of single parenthood is usually and resignedly blamed on paternal abandonment, with the only remedy being ever-more draconian but ineffective child-support "crackdowns."

Yet no evidence indicates that the proliferation of single-parent homes results from absconding fathers. If instead we accept that single motherhood is precisely what feminists say it is -- the deliberate choice of their sexual revolution -- it is then apparent that sexual liberation lies behind not only these newfangled sexual crimes, but also the larger trend of actual crime and incarceration. Feminism is driving both the criminalization of the innocent and the criminality of the guilty.

We will continue to fight a losing battle against crime, incarceration, and expansive government power until we confront the sexual ideology that is driving not only family breakdown and the ensuing social anomie, but the criminalization of the male population.

Ever-more-repressive penal measures will only further erode freedom. Under a leftist regime, conservatives must rethink their approach to crime and punishment and their unwitting collusion with America's homegrown Stalinists.


Stephen Baskerville is associate professor of government at Patrick Henry College and author of Taken Into Custody: The War Against Fathers, Marriage, and the Family.


----

Feminist defector Erin Pizzy on Feminism

 

Part 1: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D3Vux-_9yRY

Part 2: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MxiWqRFfg6w

 




You can find this article permanently at http://www.henrymakow.com/america_-_feminisms_gulag.html
Articles >>

Comments for "American Gulag -- Feminist Laws Persecute Men"

Chris said (February 7, 2010):

Your readers might find this interview intersting

http://lawfulrebellion.org/2010/01/15/dead-beat-dads-says-affidavits-work/

Paul said (February 7, 2010):

American Gulag is a great article Henry, because it seems to apply all over the world. We had some big cases here in Australia of Fathers paying over their hard earned for child support only to find through DNA testing that the child they were supporting wasn't theirs. The professional feminists tried to argue that somehow that didn't count because they'd accepted the responsibility anyway. A lot of men here have wisened up to this femiscam.

Eagle said (February 6, 2010):

"Contrary to government propaganda (and Common Law tradition), child support today has little to do with fathers abandoning their children, deserting their marriages, or even agreeing to a divorce. It is automatically assessed on all non-custodial parents, even those involuntarily divorced without grounds ("no-fault"). It is an entitlement for all divorcing mothers, regardless of their actions, and coerced from fathers, regardless of their fidelity. "

And this is overt proof that marriage, as is practiced in modern society, is nothing short of legitimized prostitution. Let's hear it for the success of Feminism where the male is reduced to nothing more than a disposable sperm donor and automatic teller.

TT said (February 6, 2010):

Back in my early navy days (1980's) one of the corpsman I worked with was in a particularly good mood. Said, he met this girl at a dance club, they had a good time. He saw her for a few weeks then she wouldn't go out with him or talk to him.

13 months later he receives a court order for a blood test. After finding out he's a dad, he calls her and asks if she wants to get married. Her answer "No, I only wanted someone to pay for my baby and the bills and I knew you were in the military". Needless to say he has been paying every month and the daughter is a wreck.

At a recent Thanksgiving party, the guys are sitting around talking; I hear the usual "its cheaper to keep her" and then one of them says, women get training in how to rip-off a future x.

He was reading something like "family circle" while on the john, and there was an article telling women they should enroll their kids in piano lessons, ballet, etc a few months before they file, so they can get more for their child support.

If women weren't so easily manipulated by the media, it might be possible to have a decent relationship.

As quoted on one feminist site "men are atms with legs".

KEVIN said (February 6, 2010):

When I was 22 I went to NYC with my girlfriend of 1 year..

We drank way too much, and she was the jealous type.. She accused me of kissing some girl at a dance club..Ridiculous..

We went to the hotel seperately, and when I arrived she was furious.. Throwing things, yelling, screaming etc.. After a while things calmed down, and we fell asleep.

Shortly after the police knocked on the door. I guess a neighbor called the cops.

They separated us, and asked me what happened.. I said we just had an arguement, it is over etc.. She was staying in the country illegaly and was scared, so apparently the police threatened to take her to jail.. She then said "I tried to rape her".. On the drive to NYC I told her about the Mike tyson trial, so this was on her mind,.. Claiming rape.

Immediately I was taken to jail, and told i was facing 5-15 years.. The prosecutor tried to act like my friend and said "This happens often.. If you just sign this paper admitting guilt the judge will like you and let you go home soon after"

I said all of this is crazy, I did nothing, she was drunk and screaming, and the last thing on my mind was sex with her..

I spent 9 days of hell in jail, until finally she called and admitted she made the entire story up. Then I was released, had to get my car out of impound, missed a semester of school, lost my job, and my belongings were stolen from the hotel room.

It is VERY easy to get railroaded by the system with ZERO evidence. Luckily for myself I was let go.

Michael said (February 6, 2010):

"American Gulag" reminds me of a case here from a local Bible college. A young girl who was the teenage daughter of a couple on campus accused a young man (who may have been on staff) of some sexual misconduct-I forget the specifics.
He was known to be exemplary, but the girl was known to have various stability issues and known to lie. Staff and leadership that knew him, the girl, and the situation testified in his defense and about the girl.

The individual was
offered some plea bargain if he admitted guilt, he flatly held his ground that he was innocent of the girls allegations, and is in prison last I heard. One staff member who I can personally say is above board, knew the girl and the young man expressed her frustration even as a "Bible believing Christian" that he should have lied to save himself the prison term. His attitude remained, "I did nothing, and will go to prison before I falsely claim that I did." This is
an excellent summation of the type of BS that is passed off in the legal system.

Jade said (February 6, 2010):

Re your post, 'American Gulag' - yes, in Canada in the divorce courts, the rules of perjury that apply in other courts, magically do not apply, nor do the rules of evidence. Normally , perjury warrants a seven year sentence, for it undermines the very foundation of our Justice system....yet, only in divorce courts, the rules against perjury simply do not, by magic sleight of hand, apply.

Caught lying? No problem for the judge. Can't prove what you say? No problem for the judge.

The rules of evidence, where a statement in court must be proven in order to be accepted, has no bearing in a divorce court, because, in fact, the outcome has been pre-determined, and the 'court date' is just a theatre enacted to lead to the pre-determined outcome, so similar to the Soviet 'show trials'.

Divorce courts are a star chamber enclave in the legal system by wink wink acquiescence of both defense and proscecution against men, where both sides agree that the male shall be determined guilty and henceforth pay and be reduced below the existential poverty line, because...the government does not want to pick up the tab for the very intra-gender situation they have created.

In Canada we had the Senator Cools Commission into how much utterly needless hurt all this did to grandparents and 50% of parents. Many data were collected; recommendations were given, and utterly ignored by media, governance, and the courts henceforth.

I was told by a lawyer friend that umongst themselves, they figure that in an uncontested divorce, they both expect to end up with 30% of family assets, while in a contested divorce, they expect to take 50% of family assets. Pre-nups were to be the condom used against this theft by the legal caste of family assets just because two people decided to share a life for a while. Yet, then on CBC, two lawyers discussing pre-nups, that can cost from 5 to 8 grand as a product lawyers offer clients, the two, a male and a female lawyer, cackled at the question of pre-nups, and offered, both in agreement, that: "Well, I think we in the Profession all agree now, that the shelf life of a pre-nup is 3 years at best."

The political caste and the courts have murdered Love in Canada and in other similar 'Western' nations. The results are obvious everywhere we look into the decay of 'our' culture.

Illuminati sites

Bigger Text | Default Text | Smaller Text |

February 6, 2010


Illuminati Web sites



http://www.clubofrome.org/eng/home/

http://www.clubmadrid.org/

http://www.chathamhouse.org.uk/

http://www.isgp.eu/organisations/1001_Club.htm

https://www.cosmosclub.org/

https://www.cosmosclub.org/Default.aspx?pageindex=1&pageid=31&status=1

http://www.esalen.org/

http://www.rothschild.com/

http://www.rothschildfoundation.eu/

http://www.rothschild.info/start.asp

http://www.rothschild.info/home/

http://www.edmond-de-rothschild.com/default-en.aspx

And how about Apostate Zionist Israel & Rothschild???

http://www.edris.co.il/
המובילות MORNING STAR ו-S&P. לרשותך עומדים צוותי השקעות מהמובילים
בענף ההשקעות בארץ ובעולם הנשענים על מסורת של ביצועים, שירות ואיכות חסרת
פשרות המאפיינים את קבוצת רוטשילד ב 200
http://www.edris.co.il/ItemPics/LCFRothschildIsrael.pdf


CALIFORNIA'S GAY MARRIAGE BATTLE By Cartier McCloud

Bigger Text | Default Text | Smaller Text |

January 29, 2010

prop8.jpgI'm 56, live in Hollywood and am a firm and devoted Christian.  I've been married twice but am single now.  Homosexuality, with all of its attendant and deadly trappings, is being used by the Illuminati to destroy everything that we hold dear.  Unable to reproduce, this perverted coupling tells the world that the values of love, marriage, children and family no longer count and should be dismissed from society forever.  And without society holding us together, we will be unable to resist the Illuminati agenda of total destruction.
 
 

 

On February 12, 2004, the mayor of San Francisco, Gavin Newsom, who is gay himself, decided that his city would start performing same-sex marriages at their courthouse.  This was in complete defiance Proposition 22, which was passed by the voting majority, which defines marriage as a "personal relation arising out of a civil contract between a man and a woman."  This gay mayor maintains that California's State Constitution's equal protection clause nullified that law.  On August 13th of this same year, the California Supreme Court ruled that Newsom overstepped his authority and nullified some 4,000 marriages in San Francisco during this period.

 

Most proponents of gay marriage compare their fight to that of early racism, which so divided this country for decades.  However, those with this view miss the point.  Racism is defined by Merriam-Webster's Online Dictionary as:

 

            Racism:  As a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits

            and capacities and that racial differences are an inherent superiority of a

            particular race.

 

I think that all races firmly believe that in some way or other they are superior to all other people and cultures.  To hate another just because of their skin color, which is what racism in America really means, is a sin against God, as He created us all, and in His great wisdom wants us all to enjoy equally the fruits of the earth.

 

However, the homosexual's desire for the traditional marriage enjoyed by men and women for the past 10,000 years, is not a case of discrimination, but a desperate need to appear "normal" in the eyes of society, and in so doing, become an accepted part of the mainstream of American culture.  If they achieve this, then their perverted sexual proclivities will be more and more accepted as just another alternative lifestyle, instead of the sick and disgusting perversion of the normal sex act between a man and a woman that it is.  An act that, in the eyes of God, is the spiritual worship of their Creator.

 

To discriminate: to discern: from Middle English and French-discerner; form Latin-discernere: to separate, to distinguish between-from dis-apart and cernere: to sift.

 

We had damn well better discriminate against this insidious madness or else we are lost forever.

 

This is not a battle for a discriminated minority to win the same rights as all others enjoy. 

 

 This is a Satanic war hell-bent on destroying traditional marriage, the normal relations between men and women, love, and, in the end, humanity itself.

 

 


Feminist Train Wrecks --Send Us Your Stories

Bigger Text | Default Text | Smaller Text |

January 28, 2010

teenage_feminist.thumbnail.jpgMike writes:

re. Why Young Men Are Avoiding Marriage

Actually, Kevin's comment really hit home:

" I had a cute 26 year old neighbor I dated. She was obtaining her masters. She was also over $80,000 just in school debt. At this point she was 27, and still not done with school. She sort of wanted kids, but also wanted the nice car, big home, career, vacation, etc. In order to afford her, and start a family, I would have to earn over $200,000 per year. She also could not cook and liked fancy restaurants. Her degree was also in something that would never translate into making money."


I'm 31, and recently dated a 35-year-old graduate student.  Now, before you lecture, I did, in fact, know better.  I knew to run away even before the first date was over.  I didn't even stick around for sex -- there's plenty of that around anyway.  No, I was curious.  I wondered if it was possible for a highly educated female to have any common sense, among other things.  Maybe it was like rubbernecking at a highway accident.  You can't not look.  It's not that I don't believe the sordid tales related by your readers; I had to see for myself.

Debt?  Oh, yeah.  I didn't get an exact figure, but did establish it at well over $150,000.  Field of study?  Humanities!  What can you do with that?  Teach, if you're lucky... and... flip burgers.  Only a wealthy man could afford to take on this blushing bride, but such a man would be looking for women 10 years her junior, with fewer brains and less baggage.  I am... and wealthy I am not.  A third-grade grasp of math makes such a relationship untenable, to say the least.

The sad reality is that this woman is headed for spinsterhood, if she doesn't find a suitable lesbian.  Her childbearing years (she wants children, yes) are nearly gone, probably gone by the time she finishes that oh-so-important PhD, and she's saddled with enough debt to buy a house AND a car.  Women used to come with trousseaux.  And what about kids, anyway?  Will there be time for them as that illustrious career is started?  Maybe get tenure first?

Anti-depressants?  You betcha.  (Wonder why!)  A string of relationships gone sour because her "work" was too important to spend time with a man?  Uh-huh.  Pets endearingly termed her "children?"  Yeppers.  Divorced parents?  Check.  Cook?  Nope.  Flaky?  More than a box of Post Toasties.   It's formulaic.

Oh, the common sense part... There must be some mathematical formula to determine how the longer one spends in academia, the more myopic and... stupid... one gets.  I had to explain the global warming hoax and the fact that it's a giant global tax scam -- like explaining it to a child.  Very slowly.  We went to watch "Avatar," after which I received a lecture on the evils of "whiteness" and Western civilization.  I'm white, she's white, and telling me that white people are evil.  Sean Connery was right.   Sometimes the only thing you can do is slap a woman.  (I didn't.  Too busy driving.  It would take too long to slap out 15 years of "higher education" anyway.)

As I said, I wanted to see how bad the train wreck was.  It was something to see, up close and personal.